Blood Tribe members vote next month on $150 million cattle claim settlement
By Tim Kalinowski on August 14, 2021.
LETHBRIDGE HERALDtkalinowski@lethbridgeherald.com
Blood Tribe members will vote in September on whether or not to ratify a $150 million settlement from the federal government over an historic cattle claim.
The vote will take place electronically Sept. 14-15 with in person voting taking place on Sept. 16.
The question Blood Tribe members will be asked to vote on is:
“Do you approve of and agree to the terms and conditions of the Blood Tribe Treaty Entitlement Cattle Specific Claim Settlement Agreement and Trust Agreement and authorize a quorum of Blood Tribe Council to sign all documents necessary to give effect to these Agreements?”
In 2000 the Blood Tribe filed suit against the federal government alleging the federal government breached its fiduciary and trust obligations with respect to management of the Blood Tribe’s cattle, land, resources and assets between 1894 and 1923 which led to the depletion of its cattle herds.
The federal government agreed to commence settlement negotiations in 2011, and finally agreed to a $150 million settlement amount in 2019.
Blood Tribe Chief Roy Fox told The Canadian Press in July of that year he expected $123 million from the cattle claim settlement would be used for “housing, capital works, a new administration building and a new skating rink.”
There will be a further virtual information session on the Blood Tribe Treaty Entitlement Cattle Specific Claim Settlement Agreement and Trust Agreement held for Blood Tribe members only on Aug. 18.
For more information visit the Blood Tribe website.
Follow @TimKalHerald on Twitter
4-3
joseph told me Blood Tribe Members need to see what they voting on
1894-1923??? Really? 150 Million dollars?. Proves it’s only all about the money. What do they do with all that cash?? Isn’t that about $100,000 per person?
You obviously know nothing about contract law or the nature of fiduciary and trust obligations in contracts. As for the time frame, Alberta law allows for cases to be presented within a prescribed period of a breach of a contract becoming known, not when that breach occurred.
What I do know is that’s my tax money that is being thrown away needlessly.
The agreement stemmed from the fact that the Canadian Government failed to live up to one of the provisions contained in Treaty 7. So your comment begs an obvious question: From your perspective, when is a deal not a deal? Alternatively, on what grounds is it permissible for one party to an agreement to fail to live up to the bargain they entered into, in part or in whole, and then not be held accountable?